[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

The scientific facts from Deutsche Tieraerztliche Wochenschrift (German veterinary weekly) volume 85 (1978), pages 62-66
This is a real study that was translated by http://www.mustaqim.co.uk/halal.htm The original study can be downloaded as a PDF


A team at the University of Hannover in Germany examined these claims through the use of EEG and ECG records during slaughter. Several electrodes were surgically implanted at various points of the skull of all the animals used in the experiment and they were then allowed to recover for several weeks. Some of the animals were subsequently slaughtered the halal way by making a swift, deep incision with a sharp knife on the neck, cutting the jugular veins and carotid arteries of both sides together with the trachea and esophagus but leaving the spinal cord intact. The remainder were stunned before slaughter using a captive bolt pistol method as is customary in Western slaughterhouses. The EEG and ECG recordings allowed to monitor the condition of the brain and heart throughout.


The Halal method

With the halal method of slaughter, there was not change in the EEG graph for the first three seconds after the incision was made, indicating that the animal did not feel any pain from the cut itself. This is not surprising. Often, if we cut ourselves with a sharp implement, we do not notice until some time later. The following three seconds were characterised by a condition of deep sleep-like unconciousness brought about by the draining of large quantities of blood from the body. Thereafter the EEG recorded a zero reading, indicating no pain at all, yet at that time the heart was still beating and the body convulsing vigorously as a reflex reaction of the spinal cord. It is this phase which is most unpleasant to onlookers who are falsely convinced that the animal suffers whilst its brain does actually no longer record any sensual messages.


The Western method

Using the Western method, the animals were apparently unconscious after stunning, and this method of dispatch would appear to be much more peaceful for the onlooker. However, the EEG readings indicated severe pain immediately after stunning. Whereas in the first example, the animal ceases to feel pain due to the brain starvation of blood and oxygen – a brain death, to put it in laymen’s terms – the second example first causes a stoppage of the heart whilst the animal still feels pain. However, there are no unsightly convulsions, which not only means that there is more blood retention in the meat, but also that this method lends itself much more conveniently to the efficiency demands of modern mass slaughter procedures. It is so much easier to dispatch an animal on the conveyor belt, if it does not move.

I suspected as much, I said earlier that the act of Stunning seems to be more of a health and safety issue than for the benefit of the animal.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I suspected as much, I said earlier that the act of Stunning seems to be more of a health and safety issue than for the benefit of the animal.

Indeed. Not shocked at all by that, nor that the throat cutting didn't actually cause pain. Obviously I have never had my throat cut, but I have had serious deep cuts, that I did not even realise I had done, until I saw the blood, and even then it didn't hurt until a little while afterwards.

[waterhog]

glad you lot are not near the vein ?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I agree with Dezzy, the whole "stunning" narrative is to appease the conscience of people who can't quite get their heads around the fact that they find animals cute and adorable but also want to cut them up and eat them.

If you have a problem with animal exploitation and suffering... don't eat meat. If you want to eat meat... accept the fact that animals suffer and are killed to supply you with that meat.

I'm not saying it doesn't matter how they LIVE... I fully advocate good living conditions for animals pre-slaughter, and good living conditions for the slave animals (cows, chickens) who provide us with other animal products whilst alive... but that last little bit where they're rounded up for the meat grinder? Yeah... that part is going to suck for Mr Cow, and it doesn't really matter how that last 2 or 3 minutes goes down.

I agree with this too. I hate reading this stuff or thinking about it too much because it really is horrendous what we do to animals. People glossing over all this and pretending we're somehow morally better than Muslims or Jews because we kill those animals a bit differently are burying their heads in the sand imho

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I agree with this too. I hate reading this stuff or thinking about it too much because it really is horrendous what we do to animals. People glossing over all this and pretending we're somehow morally better than Muslims or Jews because we kill those animals a bit differently are burying their heads in the sand imho

"We kill, skin, chop up and consume the flesh of animals in a NICE way, not like these backwards folks from backwards places "

It is a barbaric practice but, if we're being totally honest, it's just one of a whole heap of things we put on the morality back-burner in order to live a normal day to day life . We exploit animals, we exploit less fortunate humans, we exploit the planet itself. And we are ourselves exploited. But it's how our race now functions from the ground up and doing anything different would be a radical departure from everything we consider to be "a normal life", and it would also be impossible in practical terms, because of how far along we are now. I think I said in another thread recently... Any chance the human race had to go in a different direction ended in the early 1800's with the industrial revolution. The only choices now are to accept / ignore the overall ****show and live happily day to day... Or attempt to fight against it but inevitably fail. I personally just don't have the energy for grand idealism on top of the day to day stuff, so... I'm going to keep eating piggies .

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

"We kill, skin, chop up and consume the flesh of animals in a NICE way, not like these backwards folks from backwards places "

It is a barbaric practice but, if we're being totally honest, it's just one of a whole heap of things we put on the morality back-burner in order to live a normal day to day life . We exploit animals, we exploit less fortunate humans, we exploit the planet itself. And we are ourselves exploited. But it's how our race now functions from the ground up and doing anything different would be a radical departure from everything we consider to be "a normal life", and it would also be impossible in practical terms, because of how far along we are now. I think I said in another thread recently... Any chance the human race had to go in a different direction ended in the early 1800's with the industrial revolution. The only choices now are to accept / ignore the overall ****show and live happily day to day... Or attempt to fight against it but inevitably fail. I personally just don't have the energy for grand idealism on top of the day to day stuff, so... I'm going to keep eating piggies .

Yeah you're dead right. I think probably living in smaller self run communities or tribes would be the best way for humans to live but we'd still probably end up exploiting eachother

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I agree with this too. I hate reading this stuff or thinking about it too much because it really is horrendous what we do to animals. People glossing over all this and pretending we're somehow morally better than Muslims or Jews because we kill those animals a bit differently are burying their heads in the sand imho

that is not the issue here at all, as usual there is a defence mechanism that kicks in if anything negative is said about Muslim practices at all, the lengths some people have gone in this thread to defend slitting an animals throat and letting it bleed to death while slating stunning is laughable in all honesty. There is no good way to die but you would hope that an unconscious animal feels less pain than one hung upside down and left to bleed to death, nothing to do with religion just common sense.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah you're dead right. I think probably living in smaller self run communities or tribes would be the best way for humans to live but we'd still probably end up exploiting eachother

I definitely believe that smaller systems of government are always better for individual people... But like I said, we're too far gone now with the post-industrial population boom. Even if small pockets of people were to do it now... They will still have to willfully ignore the fact that most of the world doesn't have the option. Which really isn't all that different to what we do now. Everyone will to admit that the way billions of people in other nations have to live is awful... But few would be willing to dramatically change their life (for the worse, or at least, less-comfortable) to change that.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

that is not the issue here at all, as usual there is a defence mechanism that kicks in if anything negative is said about Muslim practices at all, the lengths some people have gone in this thread to defend slitting an animals throat and letting it bleed to death while slating stunning is laughable in all honesty. There is no good way to die but you would hope that an unconscious animal feels less pain than one hung upside down and left to bleed to death, nothing to do with religion just common sense.

But...its been proven this is false? And that slitting the throat causes less pain than stunning and bolting

And most people who have ever seriously cut themselves will know that you feel pretty much no pain for a fair while (serious cuts, not papercuts which hurt like a mother****er immediately). So I don't see why this would actually be different for animals

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

that is not the issue here at all, as usual there is a defence mechanism that kicks in if anything negative is said about Muslim practices at all, the lengths some people have gone in this thread to defend slitting an animals throat and letting it bleed to death while slating stunning is laughable in all honesty. There is no good way to die but you would hope that an unconscious animal feels less pain than one hung upside down and left to bleed to death, nothing to do with religion just common sense.

I have no reason to defend Muslims, that's actually my opinion on meat eating in general, it's nasty no matter what. You go to a slaughter house and tell me that "our" animals are slaughtered in a nice, friendly way

I disagree with plenty of things within the Muslim religion, especially how women are treated but this is my genuine opinion on the meat stuff. I think it's all awful and there is no moral highground here

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

But...its been proven this is false? And that slitting the throat causes less pain than stunning and bolting

proof can be offered up for just about anything these days it just makes me smile that people who will pour scorn on most religious practices will single one or two out and big them up, how does that work?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

that is not the issue here at all, as usual there is a defence mechanism that kicks in if anything negative is said about Muslim practices at all, the lengths some people have gone in this thread to defend slitting an animals throat and letting it bleed to death while slating stunning is laughable in all honesty. There is no good way to die but you would hope that an unconscious animal feels less pain than one hung upside down and left to bleed to death, nothing to do with religion just common sense.

They're not unconscious, they are stunned (paralysed) and it's been suggested - with links to evidence - that they feel all of it and take longer to die?

I wonder if you didn't read through the thread and missed the counter-argument... Or if it's just willful ignorance?

My stance on it has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with actually understanding how the brain works. If the blood supply to the brain is cut (such as when the carotid artery is sliced) it takes six to ten seconds to lose consciousness and less than a minute to die. That's < 60 seconds from no pain to death. If the animal is stunned, it has to suffer paralysis, distress, and potentially also pain for several minutes before death.

But that's "laughable" because "Muslims", apparently.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Cherie

proof can be offered up for just about anything these days

Us British folks has had enough of experts!

it just makes me smile that people who will pour scorn on most religious practices will single one or two out and big them up, how does that work?

It "works" because it has nothing to do with religion, other than people trying to take the moral high ground by claiming that western slaughter techniques are nice, happy slaughter techniques in order to (presumably...) suggest that "those other folks" are "cruel and barbaric" and don't even care about the feelings of the animals that they are about to skin and consume.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

proof can be offered up for just about anything these days it just makes me smile that people who will pour scorn on most religious practices will single one or two out and big them up, how does that work?

OK...if you can find a proper study that says stunning actually anesthetizes animals so they don't feel pain, and causes less pain than cutting the throat, please let me know and I will change my stance on this. Though I still put more stock in living conditions than way of death tbh.

I don't do religion, at all. And have criticized elements of the Muslim faith a few times. I have issues with near every religion tbh, in some way. I just really don't see why people get so up in arms about Halal slaughter. I notice even on this thread its been all about Halal, not much mention of Kosher slaughter...which is actually exactly the same. And you know the reason for cutting the throat in Kosher slaughter? Because its the method that makes the animal feel the least pain.

Basically the negative focus on anything Muslim is far more prominent than people blindly defending Muslims..of which I haven't actually seen. I have seen reasoned arguments against certain criticisms. I don;t think theres even a single member that agrees with every aspect of the Muslim faith. I think theres a few members who disagree with Muslims in general and will find any reason to be negative and blame them for all the worlds ills though sadly. To prove my point, I am tempted to make a thread about how Muslim men (as a class, not on an individual level. Not all Muslim men are like that disclaimer) treat women...and see how many people leap in to defend the Muslim men. Can't imagine there would be many.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

My stance on it has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with actually understanding how the brain works. If the blood supply to the brain is cut (such as when the carotid artery is sliced) it takes six to ten seconds to lose consciousness and less than a minute to die. That's < 60 seconds from no pain to death. If the animal is stunned, it has to suffer paralysis, distress, and potentially also pain for several minutes before death.

But that's "laughable" because "Muslims", apparently.

Well..exactly.

I didn't know studies had been done and still thought even before reading that that throat cutting would be a much more humane way of killing animals (if there is such thing as a humane way to kill animals for food..I ponder as a meat eater)

Based on knowing stunning does not anesthetize, just stops the reaction...and knowing that cutting ones self badly, tends to give no pain for a while. So in the case of throat cutting, the pain would never come, as pain certainly does not hit within seconds of a bad cut, where death does occur within seconds from cutting the throat (right)

Was quite happy to read that a study had been done. But equally happy to read studies that show the opposite...infact I am extremely interested to know if there are any studies that say the opposite.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

proof can be offered up for just about anything these days it just makes me smile that people who will pour scorn on most religious practices will single one or two out and big them up, how does that work?

This is a post on meat eating in general from another thread that had nothing to do with any religions, this is just my opinion on meat eating in general nothing to do with backing Muslims, I think it's awful regardless

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...3&postcount=43

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Well..exactly.

I didn't know studies had been done and still thought even before reading that that throat cutting would be a much more humane way of killing animals (if there is such thing as a humane way to kill animals for food..I ponder as a meat eater)

Based on knowing stunning does not anesthetize, just stops the reaction...and knowing that cutting ones self badly, tends to give no pain for a while. So in the case of throat cutting, the pain would never come, as pain certainly does not hit within seconds of a bad cut, where death does occur within seconds from cutting the throat (right)

Was quite happy to read that a study had been done. But equally happy to read studies that show the opposite...infact I am extremely interested to know if there are any studies that say the opposite.

yeah 100%, I cut the base of thumb and severed nerves while i was opening a bottle of wine years ago at work. It happened and I dropped the bottle but I didn't feel a thing, I just looked down and saw all the blood. I think your body goes into shock

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

yeah 100%, I cut the base of thumb and severed nerves while i was opening a bottle of wine years ago at work. It happened and I dropped the bottle but I didn't feel a thing, I just looked down and saw all the blood. I think your body goes into shock

Yes, adrenaline is a wonderful thing really. Something we take for granted

(though I am no scientist obviously, I am just assuming its the adrenaline that stops the pain)

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

They're not unconscious, they are stunned (paralysed) and it's been suggested - with links to evidence - that they feel all of it and take longer to die?

I wonder if you didn't read through the thread and missed the counter-argument... Or if it's just willful ignorance?

My stance on it has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with actually understanding how the brain works. If the blood supply to the brain is cut (such as when the carotid artery is sliced) it takes six to ten seconds to lose consciousness and less than a minute to die. That's < 60 seconds from no pain to death. If the animal is stunned, it has to suffer paralysis, distress, and potentially also pain for several minutes before death.

But that's "laughable" because "Muslims", apparently.

it is laughable because i guarantee if someone slit a cats throat and hung it up by its back legs to die, there would be calls for the persons genitals to be removed and I literally can't wait for you to disagree with this or at worse call me ignorant, yet another personal attack but I am used to it from you now.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Cherie

it is laughable because i guarantee if someone slit a cats throat and hung it up by its back legs to die, there would be calls for the persons genitals to be removed and I literally can't wait for you to disagree with this or at worse call me ignorant, yet another personal attack but I am used to it from you now.

Why are you comparing what is normally a domestic animal to animals that we kill for meat?

If someone strung up a cat and left them to die for no reason then yes, that would be disturbing but you have been offered proof on why stunning is not a kinder method of execution for animals that are killed for meat.

You must know the complete lunacy of your argument, surely? You can't compare what would be the murder of a pet to the culling of an animal for food.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

it is laughable because i guarantee if someone slit a cats throat and hung it up by its back legs to die, there would be calls for the persons genitals to be removed and I literally can't wait for you to disagree with this or at worse call me ignorant, yet another personal attack but I am used to it from you now.

If anyone killed a cat people would be outraged because it's a cat, an animal we consider to be a pet. People would also be outraged if someone killed a cat by stunning them and then killing them.

[Beso]

Talking pigs...whatever next.

[Beso]

If you want to see how long an animal takes to die after having its throat slit do a search for halal camels..

[Niamh.]

Deleted a post, if people want to watch videos of animals being killed they can google themselves.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Deleted a post, if people want to watch videos of animals being killed they can google themselves.

Sad..very very sad...dont bother moaning at me for evidence ever again.